View Single Post
11-01-2013, 07:46 AM
Big Phil
Registered User
Big Phil's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,449
vCash: 500
Hmmm, maybe the Belfour comparison is legit. To be honest, if Lundqvist is thought of the way Belfour is by the end of his career, mission accomplished. As far as Vezina voting and such it is pretty similar. But the thing with Belfour was that he was considered to be an erratic goalie not unlike Ron Hextall (but just better) who could never control his emotions in order to win a Cup. He let in the odd soft untimely goal in the postseason and he had trouble with his back ups. Chicago lost at times they could have won as well. I can't say Lundqvist has choked so to speak, but he just hasn't played great in the postseason where he has lifted his team anywhere.

Belfour I think had better teams and for the longest time was thought of as a goalie that couldn't win the big one. I tend to blame Belfour's playoff failures more on himself than Lundqvist not getting the Rangers further.

For example, Belfour wins the Vezina and the Calder in 1991. He is the back up goalie on the Canada Cup team. He isn't asked to play in the 1996 World Cup. He isn't asked to play in the 1998 Olympics. He wins a Cup with Dallas in 1999, plays great while doing it, takes the team to the final in 2000 and in both years beating Roy and the Avs to do it and all of the sudden he is added to the 2002 Olympic team as a third stringer, and rightly so. So if that gives you any indication of how the hockey world perceived Belfour, then there you go.

I wouldn't call Lundqvist a choker. Prior to 1999 many did with Belfour.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote